Why This Reluctance To The Culture Of Think Tanks?

 This is the age of ‘specialization’. Gone are the days when a man with half-knowledge (Neem Hakeem) in medicine, keeping some bottles of different dissolved medicinal herbs in a shelf, used to cure all the health troubles. Now when we go to a general practitioner with a complaint of any trouble in any part of the body, we are referred to the specialists for the treatment. The matter of specialization is now not peculiar to medical field only. For promoting the products of a factory, advertising the goods, raising the work efficiencies of the workers there are experts for counseling. The governments now, instead of hanging only on the opinions of cabinets and parliaments members, turn to the Think Tanks for advice in the matters of national security, defense and other important matters.
In America Brookings Institute in Washington D.C, is one of the oldest Think Tank, got established in 1927 through merge of the Institute for Government Research (founded in 1916) and Institute of Economics (1924). Rand Corporation is another huge Think Tank with its experts and workers mounting the figure in hundreds. It was established in 1948 with its original focus on national security, then it got expanded in 1960 and almost all of the American governments take its guidance to improve their policies and decision making. In the West, now almost every political party is having its own Think Tank. Many of the American universities have such forums too.

An awful state of stagnancy is manifest in the bodies and thinking of the political and religious organizations in the Muslim world. They are too stuck to their traditions to move an inch away from them. Extremely won over by their traditionalism they are not ready to having Think Tanks of their own. The culture of having their own Think Tanks or hiring the services already existing contemplative and studious forums for an objective scrutiny of their programs sounds a ridiculous thing in the political and religious organizations. Recently when I wrote to a leader of one of the most prominent Islamic organization with the proposal to create an autonomous Think Tank for reviewing and analyzing the policies of the organization in the light of a constant study of the psychological, economical and social trends of the people, his reply was: “Our Advisory Council (Majlise Shura) is enough to do that job.”

It is commonly known fact that most of the meetings of advisory or executive councils are of occasional nature and are called only on occurrence of some important issue. The members of the advisory councils are picked not on the base of an unusual insight, a vision to foresee and an expertise of know-how about future. Their qualities of elocution, their enthusiasm in the work for the organization or even their piety may count for raising the number of the members but not necessary they are sage also. Think Tanks hold the conferences to discuss the political, social and economic issues affecting the public opinion and paradigm changes from different angles. They make surveys about education, health and jobs. Coming with the concrete proposals to bring improvement in communication, food, water, transport and infrastructure problems is the areas of their consideration. Tracing out the factors behind price hike and giving rise to the crimes and why law and order situation gets deteriorated and what causes the scarcity of commodities of daily need is also their field.

Unfortunately in the Muslim countries, if something of Advisory Councils nature exists there, the personalities and hereditary right of leaderships are so dominant that they leave a little room for the new ideas, thoughts and views challenging their subduing authority. The Advisory Councils of this kind hardly go beyond stereotyping and are seldom ready to break with their decades old, dust covered, mindset of bowing to the head of the organization with whom, generally the finality of decision making lies. Thus possibility for chalking out a wise policy to bring radical and drastic changes in their strategies in the light of a deep study remains at least possible degree.

Majority of the members of Advisory Councils, in political and religious organizations, has a little expertise in particular fields. They lack in objectivity while establishing the opinions. The vividness of their thoughts is often subdued by sentimentalism, instead of a sagacious analysis of the situation. Their views are based on their own intuition and never breaking prejudices. Being such a used to and comforted in status quo, a thought of bringing a change, even for good, psychologically proves quite unnerving for them. It is heavy for them to open windows and let themselves for fresh air. They are so spellbound of the self-made picture of their power and popularity that a thing different from it causes a great upset to them and what is contrary to them is taken as an insolence, antipathy and insincerity. An objective, knowledgeable and realistic study of the situation by Think Tanks perhaps hardly suits to the seekers of mythical opportunities.